NVIDIA GeForce 910M vs AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 910M and AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 910M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- Around 2% higher core clock speed: 775 MHz vs 760 MHz
- Around 36% higher texture fill rate: 12.4 GTexel / s vs 9.12 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 384 vs 192
- Around 2% better floating-point performance: 297.6 gflops vs 291.8 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 32 nm
- Around 97% lower typical power consumption: 33 Watt vs 65 Watt
- Around 78% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 590 vs 332
- 2.5x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2629 vs 1061
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2590 vs 1153
- Around 39% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3020 vs 2177
- 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2590 vs 1153
- Around 39% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3020 vs 2177
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 18 August 2015 vs 2 October 2012 |
Core clock speed | 775 MHz vs 760 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 12.4 GTexel / s vs 9.12 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 384 vs 192 |
Floating-point performance | 297.6 gflops vs 291.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 32 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 590 vs 332 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2629 vs 1061 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2590 vs 1153 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3020 vs 2177 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2590 vs 1153 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3020 vs 2177 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP
- Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 129 vs 120
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 129 vs 120 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 910M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce 910M | AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 590 | 332 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 120 | 129 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2629 | 1061 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.448 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 155.993 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.574 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.2 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 27.733 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1344 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2590 | 1153 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3020 | 2177 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1344 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2590 | 1153 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3020 | 2177 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce 910M | AMD Radeon HD 7540D IGP | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | TeraScale 3 |
Code name | GF117 | Scrapper |
Launch date | 18 August 2015 | 2 October 2012 |
Place in performance rating | 1379 | 1382 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $67 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 775 MHz | 760 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 297.6 gflops | 291.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 32 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 192 |
Texture fill rate | 12.4 GTexel / s | 9.12 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 65 Watt |
Transistor count | 585 million | 1,303 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | IGP |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | |
Memory type | DDR3 | System Shared |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus |